Task force members comment on views about homosexuality
The Layman Online, August 6, 2004
DALLAS – Members of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity weighed in Thursday with their responses to six viewpoints about how the Presbyterian Church (USA) should consider issues of homosexuality.
The full weight of their comments seemed to suggest that, as a body, they are leaning away from endorsing the standards outlined in the denomination’s Definitive Guidance, now considered the Authoritative Interpretation of the constitution, and the constitutional law that prohibits the ordination of self-affirming, practicing homosexuals.
Again, there was no vote, and to conceal further the mystery of their deliberations, the task force members voted for the second time during their four-day meeting not to allow the press and observers to sit in on another session. They met behind closed doors Thursday afternoon. There were no nays in the voice vote to hold the executive session.
Before the executive session, William Stacy Johnson, a Princeton theologian who on Wednesday made a three-hour presentation on the six views – ranging from adherence to Biblical texts that condemn homosexual behavior to consecrating same-sex unions – led a feedback session. Specifically, he asked the task force members to identify the strengths of the six views.
Generally, task force members said the strength of the prohibition view was that it was simple and clear – but most seemed to suggest that the issue was more complex.
Prohibition viewTheological contextDeterminationCreationPerversionReconciliationRepent of being gayRedemptionReturn to true heterosexual nature or abstain from sexual relationshipsNonetheless, here are some of the task force members’ comments about the strengths of the prohibition view:
- Sarah Sanderson-Doughty: “The heart of the gospel is repentance and accepting the good news.”
- Jack Haberer: “It calls people to repent and not to indulge.”
- Johnson: “This is an issue elevated to great importance in the Presbyterian Church, an issue over which some people believe the church stands or falls.”
- Mark Achtemeier: “The emphasis it places on hearing and obeying God’s Word as a test of your obedience to God … bound up with faith in Christ’s ability to transform.
- Scott Anderson: “I hear unrepentant sexual sin is serious sin. It is capital ‘S’ sin.”
- Mary Ellen Lawson: “For advocates of this position, it would seem that there is nothing at stake because of the clear understanding of the inerrancy of Scripture. I have had people say to me, ‘Why is the task force even looking at this? What is the problem?'”
- Milton “Joe” Coalter: “What’s at stake for the Bible. At what point do you talk about Biblical writers and when do you talk about what the Bible says? This position is attractive because it’s straightforward. It has been a complication of 20th century Christianity to try to determine when God speaks and when the Biblical writers speak.”
- Jose Luis Torres: “There is so much going on, we need to hold on to something. We need to say this is good and this is bad. So I don’t need to think. We don’t have to do a lot of research. Taking into consideration the Bible without exploring or asking questions.”
Definitive guidanceTheological contextDeterminationCreationTragedyReconciliationRepent of acting gayRedemptionStoic acceptance of one’s fate through abstinenceThe remarks about the strengths of the Definitive Guidance approach included:
- Johnson: “I don’t think the Definitive Guidance document is clear. It does use the word ‘tragic’ at least once. But it doesn’t define it. It doesn’t say [homosexuality] is a sin or not a sin. My interpretation is that it’s not a fatal flaw, but homosexuals have a same-sex orientation because they live in a fallen world.”
- Vicky Curtiss: “This was formulated partly as a compromise. They make a distinction between orientation and sexual acts. Maybe this doesn’t hang together.”
- Achtemeier: “It’s a friendly refinement. It’s a document on the one hand establishing continuity with modern studies on homosexuality that, at the same time, maintains continuity with the church’s traditional readings and understanding of Scripture. The document attempts to keep faith both with the received tradition and newly acquired knowledge.”
- Johnson: “I think it’s a fact that while the Definitive Guidance strikes a compromise with modern science, it does not seek compromise with modern Biblical scholarship. It doesn’t mention the Biblical alternatives.”
JusticeTheological contextDeterminationCreationLike all other conditionsReconciliationRepent of singling out gay sins and ignoring other sinsRedemptionCreate a world in which differences no longer make a difference
- Barbara Everett Bryant: Because of the Definitive Guidance and its opposition to ordaining practicing homosexuals, “I recommend to evangelism committees not to recommend recruiting homosexuals.” She said it was illogical to invite homosexuals to join a church and not invite them to participate in the ordained leadership.
On the justice model, the comments included:
- Lonnie Oliver: “This helps us to be more pastoral and caring.”
- Barbara Wheeler. “This would tie this position to a very large selection of Biblical texts and root it very deeply in the Presbyterian tradition of phobia about idolatry.”
- Johnson: “One could argue this position on the grounds of justification by faith through grace.”
- John “Mike” Loudon: “It takes people individually.”
- Anderson: “The practical result of this position is consecration of committed relationships.”
PastoralTheological contextDeterminationCreationAmbiguousReconciliationGay relationships may be disobedient in form but obedient in substanceRedemptionExclusive committed, same-sex partnerships are better than promiscuity
- Johnson: The Bible says a “whole lot more on justice than on sexuality.”
- Johnson: “These partnerships might be necessary for the lives of these individuals for their sanctification.”
- Coalter: “There are scriptural warrants for it, but also Scriptural warrants for having a very high standard.”
Because the task force was pressed for time, there were no comments directly related to the pastoral model. But Johnson did read a statement by the Presbyterian Church U.S., the Southern denomination before reunion in 1983, that reflected the pastoral model:
- “Since homosexuality itself is such a complex phenomenon and since every homosexual person is a unique human being, it may be that no one theoretical position could be formulated which would be adequate to deal with every form of homosexuality and every homosexual person. In view of the complexity of the issue, the disagreement among Christians and the variety in the character and experience of homosexual persons themselves, it seems unwise at this time to propose any one position as the position of the church.”
CelebrationTheological contextDeterminationCreationHomosexuality is a fact of nature to be regarded as goodReconciliationGays and lesbians need to be reconciled to the goodness of their own homosexual orientationRedemptionOne’s sexuality is to be celebrated as God’s good giftTask force members made some of the following comments on the celebration model.
- Loudon: “It’s consistent with the teaching of the gay and lesbian movement.”
- Frances Taylor Gench: “There’s no double standard – one for heterosexuals and one for homosexuals.”
- Doherty-Sanderson: “It’s a helpful balance.”
- Anderson: “One of its strengths is that it seeks to answer the more traditionalist positions on its own terms. This is another view of natural theology. It wants to answer natural theology with natural theology.”
- Johnson: “If one happened to think that natural theology was not a good principle, then this demonstrates the problem.”
- Curtiss: It addresses the power issues – claiming the power of their own rather than be described by others.”
ConsecrationTheological contextDeterminationCreationFact of nature not to be condemned, but also ambiguous and needing to be rightly orderedReconciliationSin does not reside in the orientation but in whether one rightly orders one’s life. Our relationships are a means of grace.RedemptionOne’s sexuality is to be consecrated through an exclusive, committed relationship, blessed by the church. People, not sexuality, are the focus of the celebrationWith little time left before it closed the doors to meet without the press and observers, task force members addressed the consecration model quickly.
- Wilkinson: “It places the emphasis on order and plays to Calvinist leanings.”
- Doherty-Sanderson: “This has clear implications for the wide ministry of the church.”
- Bryant: “It comes to a question of whether we could craft something out of the last four, not out of the first two.”
- Johnson: “It has a Trinitarian focus.”
- Wheeler: “In this position, more is given to the doctrine of God. It even raises the question for the other positions: What’s their doctrine of God.”